Recording in progress and our own member. So pretty pretty easy. >> Joe. >> Yeah, it's Joe. Yeah. >> All right. So, I'm going to start. Okay.
Hello everyone. This is Chuck Terrone readings, conservation administrator. This meeting will be conducted in person and in remote format consistent with chapter 2 of the act 2023 which further extend the certain provisions of CO 19 measures regarding remote participation in public meeting
until June 30th 2027. Please note all items listed may be in fact discussed and other items not listed may be brought up for discussion to the extent permitted by law. The agenda includes those matters which can be reasonably anticipated to be discussed at tonight's meeting. This
meeting uh this meeting is being recorded. Uh the materials that we're looking at are available at the conservation division page and Brian Bo the commission chair will facilitate the meeting. Please note there will be a public comment period at
the end of each hearing. Each vote taken tonight at this meeting will be conducted by roll call. We will begin by roll call attendance and Brian uh can you please review the agenda and take roll call attendance. >> Sure. I'll review the agenda first. Uh
first item is zero small lane. By applicant's request that will be continued. Next is 400 Grove Street. By applicants request that will be withdrawn. Next is 23 family circle which is
opening a public hearing for notice of intent. Um that's it for our hearings tonight. We'll then move on to a number of discussion items including discussion on the trail grant we're working on budget update
removal policy update and fees conversation. And then that'll be followed by old new business a number of items. Um what's important of which is we have a number of minutes to approve so we can get some off the docket and that's it for
tonight. Having said that we'll do a roll call. This will be the order that we vote in. Walter >> Walter Talbot commissioner present. >> Tim Michelle member present >> member present. >> Rio member present.
>> Martha Moore vice chair present. Ryan Bro, chair present >> and associate >> and Joseph Flurry associate member present. >> Thank you Joe. Okay. Um on our first item for tonight is zero small lane at
the applicant's request. They'd like to continue this until February 11th. So we have to have a motion and a vote to do that. Can I >> I move that we continue zero small lane to February 11th, 2026. Walter Talbot
seconds. Walter Talbot's in favor. >> Michelle in favor. >> The ox in favor. >> In favor. >> Martha Moore in favor. >> Brian Bow in favor. Okay. Next is 400 G Street. The applicant on this would like to withdraw. We need a motion um to
accept the withdrawal. I have a motion, please. >> I move that we accept the withdrawal of the application about 400 G Street. >> Walter Talbot seconds. Walter Talbertson for all in favor. >> Dor in favor. >> Rick Kio in favor.
>> Arthur Moore in favor. >> Brian Brian Moore in favor. Okay. And then to our first hearing with meat on it. Uh this is 23 family circle. Um I see everybody's here. Is there anybody's going to be online as well? Okay. So
I'll read the blurb before before Jack starts. This is opening a public hearing on notice of intent filed by Sean Griier pursuant to Massachusetts general law chapter 131 section 40 the wetlands protection act and not readen wetland
protection bylaw section 7.1 for proposed raising of an existing barn and shed extension of a paved driveway and the construction of a portion of an accessory dwelling unit. All the work is within a 100 foot buffer zone to a
bordering vegetated wetland. The application of plans can be viewed on the conservation division page on the current project acceptive map 43 lot 5 D file number 270-0807. Can you introduce yourself please?
>> Yes. Thank you. For the record, my name is Jack Sullivan. I'm owner of the Solivan Engineering Group. Um, I'm here tonight with Andrea from NBA Builders and the owner, uh, Sean 23 Family Circle. Um, this property is
located at the end of, uh, Family Circle, which is a dead end street off of, uh, Grove Street. It's a 10.4 acre parcel. There's an existing single family home, paved driveway, a barn, and a shed. Um, as the chairman noted, DP
has issued a file number for the site, 270-0807. All the abutters were notifi notified by certified mail and proof of those mailings were provided to Chuck. Uh, the wetlands for this project were flagged by Norris Environmental. Um, pretty flat
site. Um, the applicant's looking to demo a barn that's 26 by 32 feet. It's a singlestory barn. They're looking to demolish a shed located to the rear of the barn. They're looking to do a um just a little over 500 square foot extension of a
paved driveway to access an accessory dwelling unit um or an ADU. Um a portion of that ADU is located within the 100 foot buffer zone. Really just a small portion of it. It's basically a portion of the garage. which is about 186 square
feet of this ADU will be within the 100 foot buffer zone. Um outside of the 100 foot buffer zone, um remainder of the ADU and there'll be a patio and I show a proposed soil stockpile area for stockpiling of soils. Um for this
project, no trees are to be cut. I do show um some of the mature trees um within the area of of the barn ADU and shed. Um, as I stated, it's relatively flat, so there's very little grading changes. Um, if it wasn't for demoing
the barn, which is the footprint is 832 square feet and the shed is 800 square f feet, this probably would have qualified for an RDA. Um, since the ADU is 90 ft away. Um, but with all the activities going on, I decided to, uh, go with a
full notice of intent. I did start off stating I think I believe that this site's within the um aquifer protection district. Due to the lot size, they're not even close to um any sort of coverage limits. Um and typically when I come before this commission, I I do look
to provide drainage um for additions and things of that nature. But in this case where we're removing 832 square ft of the barn and that's 50 ft from the wetlands, 80 square ft of the shed and we're only adding uh about 700 square
ft. There'll be a reduction in impervious surfaces and all um structures are now further away from the wetlands than the existing condition. Um I did do a sitewalk. A few members were on that sitewalk on Monday. The owner was on that sitewalk as well. was a
productive sitewalk so we could see the site. And I should note that the ADU will have a full basement. Um, a lot of these ADUs um are slab on grade. This will be the second one that I've done that has a full basement. But I um that's why I show a proposed soil
stockpile area as well because if you're digging for a full foundation, they may need an area to stockpile soils. Um I'll turn it over to the commission for any questions you might have. >> Thanks, Jack. >> Yeah. Any questions, comments from the commission?
>> Okay, >> I guess I have to start. Y >> um >> that's why it's moderate. >> Uh well, you the last thing you mentioned was the soil stockpile. Um how will you protect that stockpile from erosion? Assuming it's going to be there
more than a couple of days, >> they could surround it with a 12 inch sock. Okay, that would be good, I think. You know, if you're holding it long enough to put in the foundation, then fill back around the foundation.
>> If you want to make that a condition, they'd be fine with that. They can surround it with mulch sock. >> Okay. Um we did um have a good sitewalk and um most of the
area up to the wetland line is um mowed. it in the plot plan. It doesn't look quite like that because the squiggle line is showing the overhang of the trees, but the actual wetland flags were
put right along the line of the trunks of the trees. Um, so um, one of the things I'm concerned about is that we often try to have that first 25 ft be zone of natural vegetation. And in the
case of this yard, it's all mode. So, um, that would be something I'd be looking at to, um, to recover some of that zone of natural vegetation in some way. Um, I also had a
question. Um, where is the sewer and water lines going to go that get to the ADU? >> Glad you said that. I forgot to mention that. So the reading engineering department requires all services to come from the existing house.
>> Okay. So on the plan um I show a line it's labeled PW that that's a proposed water service and then um I have a PS for the proposed sewer. Um it's running through the patio area. So it's outside the 100 foot buffer.
Reading doesn't allow uh separate connections out to the street for ADUs. They don't want a second meter on the a water meter on the ADU and they don't want another service going out to the store main. So those will be connected from the house >> and I presume they'll be dug down below frost line.
>> Correct. >> Okay. >> Yeah. >> Um and will that also cause soil stockpiling or is it cut and cover? >> Cut and cover. >> Don't I sound smart? >> Yeah. >> Yep. They'll dig it. they'll put in the
pipe and then they'll back fill the same day. >> Okay. >> And don't get carried away with >> um Okay. And um most of that's going under the patio, but I assume they will um reveate on top of the part that's not under the patio.
>> Correct. >> Okay. Um Okay. Um the only other thing we noticed when we were out there um well a few other
things um between 10A and 9A wetland flags. It looks like some previous um occurrence multiple years ago did some filling in that area of um look like con uh not
construction to be but soil and rocks that goes into the wetland. Um I'd like to see that removed so that we can restore the uh level of the wetland in that area. Mhm. >> And we also noticed that there are some
places where the landscapers or someone was um pushing leaves back beyond the wetland line. Um and we usually ask for the leaves to be removed down to where they are starting to decompose so that
the upper layers of leaves are removed. Um, so I propose that as a condition. And um, in the write up by Norse Environmental, she mentions notweed, buckthornne, and bittersweet. And those are all invasive
species that um, even though behind the wetland line, you're not supposed to be um, removing vegetation, um, there is an exception made for invasive species. So, um I always like to see um some attempt to
keep the bittersweet from killing the trees and etc. Um so I don't know >> with Sean's open too. >> Yeah. Okay. Um that's all my comments. Anybody else? >> Just a quick question about the imperous
surface like how was that calculation made? Hm. Uh, it's the existing barn is 32 by 26 and the other one is 41 by roughly 30, right? So, isn't the impervious surface actually increasing?
>> Um, yes, but inside the 100 foot buffer zone, the we're removing more impervious than we're creating. >> So, you're correct. Yeah, if if I was to add up the I have a table on the right side of the plan showing um all the impervious services in the
existing condition in the proposed. So there's a you're you're right the the ADU itself is larger than the 186 square feet I'm showing within the 100 foot. But the idea is to show that we there'll be a net uh decrease of impervious surfaces within the 100 foot buffer
zone. >> Okay. >> Even when you count the driveway. >> Yep. >> Okay. >> The driveway increases just a little over 500 square feet. 510 and the garage is 186 square ft within
the 100 and the barn's 832 ft and the sheds 80. >> So we're reducing everything by about 200 square feet. >> I have some questions. Um you talked about a stockpile area for the soil being removed. Uh what about an area for
the debris from the demolition of the barn itself? >> So the barn will get demolished and Andrea I'm thinking they'll they'll load that right out right out and truck it right out. Go ahead. >> Okay. So immediate >> immediately same day. >> Okay. Good.
>> And then I might jump to your next question, Brian. But once they remove that barn and and and level out that area, um would it be acceptable to the commission if that was like a lay down area for um the lumber >> the in material? Yeah, that was my next
question. >> Okay. >> Yes, that would be fine. >> Um >> will Jack want it's we will at some point want a dumpster though on site, but we can put that outside the buffer if you're like during construction.
So outside the buffer. Yeah. Okay. Yeah, that's um let's talk a little bit more about the plantings in the buffers. So Martha mentioned it. Um and she's right. The
grass goes right up to the uh the flags. Um, so we typically look for up to 25 feet of an area there. What I was thinking is, um,
in the area near where the debris, the soil and stuff from the previous construction, not your construction, the previous one, there's a little peninsula there. Um, so if you put more plantings in there, then you wouldn't necessarily
need to have them up on the side nearer the golf course. Um, so we got plenty of of area to cover without having to encroach all the way around. >> Were you thinking you might have to pan up a little bit, Chuck, on that? But are
you the little peninsula is like between flag 15A and 17A? >> Yeah, down in that area. Um you can see that's like this angle this triangular area. >> Yeah. >> And so if there was some kind of uh
in that entire triangular area we would get a lot of surface um and protection without necessarily going all the way around. Um, and talk about the plantings, you know, we're talking
about, but for your benefit, um, we often look for trees, but it can be shrubs. What we want is multi-layered. So, multi-layer, you know, tree, shrub, ground cover. So, um you would have to
present a planning planting plan to say what you were going to what would you plant and where it would be, but it needs to include ground cover as well. Um and there's a list on the uh conservation website or acceptable u
native trees and shrubs. Um, and actually Martha pointed out, there's a list apparently of ones that are more deer resistant. I say more deer resistant because as Jack pointed out, if they're hungry enough, nothing's going to be resisted.
>> And I think we were looking at the fact that there's that whole tree line. So, normally we'd ask for more trees as well as shrubs, but I think in that area it could be mostly shrubs because we've
already got trees. >> Yeah, we have trees. U plus the trees would be overhanging which would the shade would affect their >> Yeah. >> viability anyway. Even though once the sun comes up beyond the trees to the
back of the house, they would get some light, but clearly the overhang would would impact some light. My only concern is that particular area gets no sun. You have those the the giant tree at the end of the driveway, plus you have those two
other mature trees that were right directly in front of that. Plus, like there's almost no sunlight whatsoever that comes through to that part of the yard at almost any time of day. Maybe you get an hour. I don't mind doing some
planting. I just want to make sure that what is on your list will actually survive there. >> So, you'd want to pick some shade tolerant species. You >> sure will. Uh, so, you know, I don't I don't mind if it's that kind of area,
cutout area down in the back corner. And I guess I also was thinking in between 10 and nine flags 10 A and 9A where you're taking the fill out, you might
want to put in something that's um native species after you take out the fill so that you don't just end up with buckthornne taking over that whole section. So that would be the other place I would be looking for. >> Um
less replanting there than the other place, but some. >> Okay. >> And again, shade tolerant. That could even be um some ferns. They would do very nicely in that patch. And there are some ferns on the list. >> I hope that Jack is writing that down
because I will >> I am writing it down because I won't remember either. Um, when Sean puts together that planting plan, is that something that would come back before the just for his knowledge? Would he have to come back before the commission or is it something
Chuck would look at and approve? >> Let's make that a condition, have that conversation at that point. >> Sure. >> I think to some extent it depends on how extensive it is, how straightforward it is. Um, we're not looking for something drawn by an engineer. It's a sketch of
the area showing uh the placement where you're going to put shrubs, assuming you're putting shrubs uh in the types. Um it doesn't have to be anything that Jack does or an arborist or anything else. Um think as as I mentioned when we
were on the site, I haven't given much thought to the overall landscape plan for the entire site at this point. We wanted to get the get the two structures built, get the patio built, and then kind of go from there because I assuming like there it's going to be a big dirt
pile where the uh where the barn used to be. So, we're going to have to figure out all that. I'm assuming that's going to be one, but I have to think through all of that. I'm happy to incorporate into that plan whenever we do >> and we those two spots >> and we talked about that. We're not really looking for ornamental kind of
plants. if you want to do some that's great up by the house or whatever but doesn't really help as far as the Sure I can even if I wanted to down there. >> I just thought I'd put it on the record. >> Yeah. Uh again, happy to put whatever is approved on the approved list in those
two particular areas and incorporate that into the landscape plan that the lovely folks at MBA are going to help me with when we get to that point. >> Um that's the main points I had. Chuck, do you want to add anything?
>> Sure. Um, so between uh so I just like to just add to the plan between the shed and the barn and it's a lot of heavy construction. So I'd like to see the uh 12-in mall sock and some orange construction fence just so they don't go
beyond it. So because that's your limit of work. >> Yeah. Um, >> have they drawn the mulch sock line far enough away that the builders will be able to do the work within that space? >> I I think so because it's just
demolition. So, it should be >> Does that also include access to that existing stockpile of uh fencing and waste? Uh just beyond the shed. I think it's between like the 100 foot buffer and the 35 foot buffer. >> Yeah. The debris behind the shed.
>> Yeah. >> Yeah. I think what they're saying is see how the mulch sock is drawn. If it's like in that area, is there enough space to get to it? >> I think the stuff behind the shed could be removed by hand. Oh, >> okay. Yeah. It wasn't anything that you'd really need a machine for.
>> Okay. too lazy to do it myself. >> Another question is what was the historic use of the existing barn? Should we >> and be concerned about soil contamination, oil gas? >> I didn't hear what you said, Chuck.
>> What's that? >> I didn't hear what you said. >> Uh soil contamination from the existing barn. I don't know the age. I don't know if it's on a slab or if it's just a dirt floor. And uh >> a dirt floor, right? third floor barn that was used for horses.
>> And we don't think there's a footing associated with that barn because there were thoughts originally that they were going to try to convert the barn to the ADU. >> Yeah. >> And there's too many issues. And when we were out there when we did that, you look at it, it doesn't look like there's a footing. And it's like a cement block.
So they they'll just pave in the barn, take it out, bit fold in the block. They're not going to be removing soil from that area. They don't have to excavate. Since we bought the house in 2019, I think I've been in the barn four times. >> Uh don't go in there a lot, but there
are two horse stalls and a a hoft. That's it. >> In tad, you don't store anything in there. >> Is it like an unpainted barn? >> Yep. >> The cinder block is painted tan. >> Sorry. The exterior is painted in interior. There's no paint.
>> Um Okay. Uh yeah, I was concerned about the oil. And then uh is there any other review from departments in town from like CPDC or the engineering department after the conservation commission um either approves. I'm just want to know
if there's going to be changes that we need to anticipate. >> No, we don't have to go in front of the planning board. Um you're the only board we have to go in front of. No ZBA, no planning. These ADUs are by right, but engineering weighs in on like the utility connections. But where I'm
showing the connection to the house that it should be fine. If I had utilities in any other way, they'd mark up my plan. But I I know what they look for. So yeah, the we don't have any other boards we have to go to except you guys. >> If you want to include a condition that if we
>> change something and have to come back, that's totally fine. Or if there's a change determined by another board, if we figure out that we do have to go to another board, >> that's a standard. We have a standard condition, but we just want to make sure that the let's say the engineering
department doesn't like the driveway, but they have reviewed it and they they think that this is a good spot. So, the width is fine and the entrance is fine. >> Yeah. Okay. Um All right. Well, that's all I have for questions.
>> Okay. Any last questions or anything? >> Okay. Um, so then can I have a motion to close the hearing on 23 family circle? >> I move to close the hearing on 23 family circle. >> Walter Tin seconds. Walter Talbert
approves. >> Tim in favor. >> J. >> Martha Moore in favor. >> Ryan in favor. Okay. >> So there wasn't anyone >> Oh. >> out there. Um, >> yeah. Any public comment? >> Yeah.
But you could just ask anyways. >> Now, is there any public comment? Any questions from anybody out in the Zoom audience? >> Hearing none, >> use the raise hand functions. Well, they I don't think we'll be able to um just wave on camera. Turn your camera on,
wave. We'll see you. And seeing none. >> Okay. In that case, can we list some conditions, please? Uh what conditions did people bring up in the conversation? >> I'll run them down. You guys can fill in the rest. Um so um
erosion control around the stockpile area. >> The 25 foot becomes a no mo zone. Then that 25 foot between flags nine and 10 will be some planting and between 17 or 14 through 17 there'll be some
additional plantings where I'll expect some planting plans in those areas. >> Um were we asking for the whole 25 foot all the way along or only in some areas? two areas, the triangular piece and then up by where the >> it sounded like when you were talking
about you were saying usually we don't we don't allow lawn in in the 25 foot area and the lawn goes right up to the >> that's the no >> you have the floor I don't know what you're asking that's what I heard >> um
often we ask for um some give back of that mode 25 ft. And I thought Brian was saying specifically planting in the area around
15 to 17, not all the way along the entire strip. >> So that's what I was looking for planting all the way around. I do think Chuck's idea of moving the mole line back away from the flags makes sense, though. >> Okay.
>> Do you understand the the point we're making there? I I thought we were I know we've closed public hearing so I understand that so thank you for letting me speak anyway. I thought we were >> Excuse me. I I forgot. Can you come up here and introduce yourself? >> My fault.
>> Sorry. I thought Jack introduced me. >> Sean Brier uh 23 Family Circle owner and applicant. My understanding of the conversation was that we were saying we would do the plantings kind of between in those two areas in lie of having to
move the bow line. I I don't love that just because I'd like to kind of leave it the way it's always been. But I mean if it's a condition to get it through then so be it. I I will do the plantings either way. My understanding of the conversation was I
think a little bit different. So, so my I I would be comfortable with planting in the triangular area. Um I would like to see you stop mowing right up to the line. Doesn't mean you have to
plant around the edge, but uh give it a chance for some natural growth. >> Just going to have to do something to I mean uh kindly I don't do the mowing myself, so uh >> yeah, >> I'll have to figure out how to do that. So what what is the
So it's it's kind of um so we have this 25 foot line in town. It's been established as a zone of natural vegetation. I mean certainly it has been pushed closer to the wetlands just like whoever own the house before you has done that. But along with our 25 foot
zone of natural vegetation, we usually require um branded bounds or concrete bounds showing that behind that area is a no touch zone. So that would probably have come up during this conversation about
how we're going to manage the bounds because they're required on the 25 foot line. >> Should we unclose the hearing because we didn't talk about the bounds and have a chance to discuss bounds? >> Yeah, but you you can you can have the
applicant talk about it, but you also can just talk about it yourself. Okay. >> Because it's standard. But that's I think that since Brian invited him to the podium, we've essentially done that. So why don't you reopen the hearing?
>> So I move that we reopen the hearing on 23 family circle. >> Walter Talbet seconds. Walter Tabet approves. >> In favor in favor, >> Martha Moore in favor.
>> Okay. So the topic is has to do with around the edges. Um, and we were looking to not require plantings all the way around. So now we're talking about two things. The most immediate one is
the placement of granite bounds. And you know what we mean by granite bounds? >> No. >> It a granite post um that gets put in the ground. So it uh marks the area up to which you can do
things beyond that. You can walk in and what have you, but you can't it's a no disturb area. So you can't mow uh and things of that nature. >> How many are we talking? How what's the interval? >> Uh the interview interval is 40 feet I
think. Yes, it's >> 40 turning points, but the commission has often come up with accommodations for that. So, what we often would do is have you put them at property edges um and maybe have one in the middle so it's
a straight line or some kind of a of a clear demarcation as opposed to putting them all the way along. >> Yeah. So, that would only be needed if you if you wanted to have the no mo area. You decided that these planting areas are enough. I would
we usually ask to have them at the edges that which kind of makes sense but then maybe near the monomo area and there's different things besides granite or concrete bounds but some sort of sign or something to to demarcate that's >> you know semi-permanent. These are 4 in
by 4 in by 3 foot long granite bounds. Two feet go in the ground one foots above the ground. That's typically how they're shown or >> cheap. Um, >> it can be concrete also. It doesn't have
to be granite, >> right? Isn't that right? >> I I respect the discussion here and I appreciate the fact that you're letting me talk this through with you guys. This is not something that we had discussed significantly on site. So, apologies for thinking through it in real time in a
public meeting. Uh my my preference is I I don't mind doing the planning. My my preference is I don't mind doing some kind of demarcation for a normal land. Uh I don't love having to go as far up and
lose as much of the yard as we would have to. It's been that way for a very very very long time. I guess my thought would be I'd like the commission to focus on the overall net benefit to the site of what we're doing
and let us leave as much of it as I can the way it is. But I respect what you're asking for and I'm hoping to find a little bit of a a middle ground if we could. Like I thought the you know giving back that peninsula and clearing
out the debris are are good suggestions and I'm happy to do those. Going beyond that, I'm I'm struggling a little bit more with mostly the expense. >> Yeah. Can I understand something? We're saying don't put any plantings between
25 and 35. Just let it go natural. No mowing, no fertilizing. Just let it go. My concern is if we ask him to do that, will we end up with a 25- foot swath of
notweed and buckthornne? If we're if we're not mowing, but we're also not planting, I don't think we're going to get what we want, which is native vegetation in there. So that's why I'm inclined to let him continue to
mow most of that area, replant whatever we're asking to replant and try to keep the invasives out of the area that's not being mowed. So that was my my reason for questioning no mow all the way up to
the 25 foot. Um, and I'm looking at if I were going to put any granite bounds on there, I would think one at the point of the driveway where it crosses the 25 ft line would be a reasonable place to put a granite bound right at the corner of
the driveway. Um, and that would indicate that 25 foot line in that location. and maybe one other one um where the 25 foot line meets the woods up at the top edge.
You know, those two feel to me like they would give you some sense of where the 25 ft zone is without having to ask them to put in multiple bone stones. Yeah. Especially if they're not mowing.
If they're not leaving that unmowed, then you'd have posts in the middle of the lawn. And I'm not opting for that. I'm not campaigning for that. But what do the rest of you guys think? I'm only one vote. >> What other options are there? Chuck, you
mentioned that there's more than just say, you know, it's it's a I don't know how long it is, but it looks very long. And I'm just thinking like if conservation administrator went out there and was trying to figure out where the 25 foot line is, those two locations are not going to be very helpful. I think the
one near the driveway is going to get taken out the first snowstorm with the plow. Um, so maybe a little bit back from there, but that's a good spot, but it doesn't help you doesn't help you figure out where things
are. I mean, it's likely nothing else gets built out there, but someday maybe. So, I don't know if any of them make sense unless you do more. So, onif 1503, and I'm not advocating more. I'm just saying doesn't sound like there's a
budget for this, but more would be 1503 like we said every 80 ft and then something in the turning intervals and at both edges. So, >> what about combining that and have one near the
driveway but not right on it to avoid the plow situation and then have one at the sharp turning point near the triangle to catch that turn and then one up all the way to the top um by the
property boundary there. It's not exactly along the 25 ft, but it gives a straight line demar. >> Yeah, that's not a boundary. That's this is a huge lot. So, um, this, you know, it just continues, but it might be
outside of the mode area. I think you should focus on your planting areas. It would be nice to have one in front of each one of those planting areas. The other two seem to be out in the, you know, out in the back 50 back 40, you know, not really connected to
something. I mean, this plan will exist. So, I think your choice is do it all or cut it down to just where the plantings are. If you're not going to do the ming, >> I would be okay with just the plantings and not overwhelming his yard with all the granite posts.
>> Yeah. So, a granite post in front of each one of the plantings so people understand that that's uh the zone of natural vegetation or at least it would allow someone to understand that it comes up that far and they should look at a plan to figure out the rest if
that's the case. And um I don't think your landscapers are going to take out plants. So, that should work out. >> No wonder I'm I'm concerned if there's like a kind of a long run of just letting it go native. You guys are not
concerned with the aesthetics, but I am like that would look bad, right? >> Yeah. I don't think that's on the table. >> So, what I I'm fine if we identify a couple of spots where, you know, can give back some space and do some plannings. I think that's >> Can you mark on that map where you're
thinking the >> posts would be? >> Oh, I'm not sure I can do this, but let's try. Uh, here's Brian Spot. >> Do I don't have permission to make these
marks? Well, here's one right here. >> All right. I'm not going to try. One's going to be there. One's going to be >> between uh what was it? seven and uh so between like one in the middle of seven uh 14 and 17 and one in the middle of 9
and 10. >> Yeah. Just serve as a reminder not to not to disturb beyond that. >> Where did you get three? >> You say one by the corner, one at the ben, and then one between 9 and >> Yeah. one up by the driveway and then
one at I don't think me I don't think the driveway one is makes sense based on how the how it looks on site and have one here and have one here
and you were talking about something out in this area >> that's the way I was thinking >> okay yeah which doesn't put one between nine and 10 and I think that makes sense because we're not talking about putting
vegetation on the 25- ft zone of the wetland line. We're talking about reveating the wetland side of the wetland line in that area. >> So, so between uh 14 and 17 that area is filled in up to the 25 foot line. Is
that what you're >> Yeah. the the the flagging and the grass comes right up to the flagging in in many. >> So, it makes sense there. But in 10 and 9 and 10, I thought there was some debris and some fill
in the tree row very close to the wetland. >> Oh, it's in the wetland on the far side, the wetland side of the lawn. >> So, you said take that out and plant it, but that's not up by the 25 foot line. So now there's going to be a post kind of in the middle of the lawn. >> Yeah. I don't think that's where a post
should be. >> Okay. >> So we have one established. Where should the next one be? >> One where the the curve is at the top edge of the 25 foot where it hits the woods. >> Okay. >> So in there as it goes into the woods
like just above 7A for example. >> Okay. And then I was proposing one near the driveway, but maybe at the corner where >> Did I say yes to just above 7A? >> I think you did. >> That's going to be in the middle of the lawn.
>> 7A. It's in the woods. >> 7A. 7. >> It's under the tree canopy. >> Keep going on the map. Keep going. >> Oh, sorry. 7A. There it is. I I'm looking down here. Okay. Sorry. So that way it would be down to >> three
>> down to three. So three posts, >> two corners at the bottom and one >> and again it doesn't follow the line exactly. But >> where's the one at 7A? >> It's up here >> way up where it goes up over the is bend >> in here
>> and it could be into the wet woods a little bit so it's not sticking out in your lawn. It's >> tucked in the woods. No issue with >> Yeah. I was going to suggest if if it was possible if you could plant a tree there and serve that p purpose. >> There's a lot of trees there already.
>> There is. Okay. >> Did you see the uh the ripple? That's the canopy. >> That's the canopy. Understood. >> That way you get away with minimal number of post >> and one still the one by the driveway. >> Yeah. doesn't have to be right at the driveway. You were saying backaways and
I'm seeing another corner that's kind of represented by 19A, >> right? >> You go to that corner near 19A. It's in the tree line again. Yeah, like right there. That would be what I propose.
The hearing's open, so you have a chance, Sean, to have your say in that. >> I think those three are fine. I'm assuming they don't cost like a million dollars each. I'm fine. >> It's just under a million. Um,
so long as we're open again, let me ask about what you said about the area with the construction debris from way back when, not the most recent one >> between >> right. So >> between 9A and 10, >> there's some little ripples there of
soil that have grown over and been there forever. We're not talking about removing that soil. We were talking about picking up some of the pieces of >> concrete and brick that are out there. >> No, I was actually picturing taking that
fill out. There's a kind of a projection of fill that goes beyond the wetland line there >> for like three or four feet into the wetland. There's >> piles of dirt with rocks on top. >> Right. Now, that's been there a long
time. So, that would be excavating in the wetland. I think that's a bigger deal. >> Okay. So, you think we shouldn't do that? I think at this point it's whatever number of years, decades that it's been there, it's grown over. I
would pick up the the pieces of construction debris that we saw, which is not a huge deal just to clean up the area, but I don't think we should try and dig out uh the fill. I mean, we've been other
places where it's been filled clearly and we've said, "Okay, long time it is what it is. We haven't tried to undo that. >> Okay. In that case, I withdraw my suggestion of removing that fill and also then we don't need to
plant because they won't in that area between 9 and 10. We can skip the fur. >> Planting is back to just the triangular area in the bottom. >> That's okay with me. >> You guys, everybody else okay with that? >> I'm good with that. >> I just want to understand the mowing.
Going back to the previous question about mowing in that area, we don't we don't we we're okay with them mowing there, right? >> Well, they're actually going to be planting, >> okay, >> shrubs, ground cover, whatever, so they can mow around the shrubs. >> Um, but we would prefer that they put
the plantings and just let it go. Um, and that won't be a a eyesore situation because you're going to have shrubs in there and what have you and then you're going to end up with natural grasses and ground ground cover and what have you. >> Now, when you're talking about that,
you're talking about around 17 to 14 >> and we're not talking about planting shrubs along from 14 up to seven. >> Correct. >> Okay. And are we allowing him to mow where he has historically mowed
>> except in that triangular area? >> Yeah. Okay, I'm good with that. Are you good with that, Chuck? >> I'm good with whatever the commission agrees to. >> So, obviously we've talked too long. Okay. Any last minute conversation
before we close again? >> I don't see Joe. Is this his hand? >> Want to see if anyone's on? No, I'm I'm I'm good. >> I don't think there's anyone here. Although there's participant one, two, three, four, and five. Looks like
>> different people. Sure. >> Again, I have a motion. >> Okay. I move to close the hearing. >> Walter second. Walter approves. >> In favor, >> in favor, >> Rick Kio in favor. >> Martha Moore in favor.
>> Ryan Moore in favor. Okay, back to the conditions. What do you have so far, Chuck? >> Uh, where was it around the stockpile area? Um, construction fence near the shed from the shed to the barn. That orange construction fence. Uh, managed
bittersweet. That was kind of vague. Also, I don't know if you want to. I just wrote manage bittersweet. Is that where they're just going to chop the vines at the base of the tree? Okay. And by the way, it's trees. Uh we talked on on the walk, there's lots of trees that
are compromised. >> Planting area between uh planting area, that's a restoration between area 17 and 14. And um native species. No, that was for nine and 10, so we're
not doing that anymore. And then just a granite bound at 7A. um at the V on 16A and at 19A near the driveway. >> Okay. >> I say granite, but it's it's granite or concrete.
>> And you still do the rebar piece. >> We have two choices, granite. >> Yeah, I know. That was in the old days. Um so then the next question is for this planting plan is this something that you
think should come back to the commission or you think administrator approval will be sufficient? >> Um no I think that it's it's fine to just approve it the way it is. It's just a small section of this overall big project.
Um, I think that uh it would be fine as long as Jack understands what we're talking about and um so it sounds like it's out to the 25 foot line and between those flags that were mentioned
>> and sort of not a straight line but filled right >> have a lot of faith in Sean. >> Okay. Um any other conditions? Anything from you?
All right. So at that point, can I have a motion um to issue order conditions for 23 family circle? >> I move to issue an order of conditions for 25 23 family circle.
>> Walter Talbert seconds. Walter Talbot approves. Michelle in favor. >> Rock City. >> Rick Kio in favor. >> Martha Moore in favor. >> Rainbow in favor. Thank you for putting up with our back and forth. >> No. Thank you very much.
>> Good luck with your project. >> Okay, that's it for the hearings. So now discussion items. The first one is the DCRI trail grant. uh
you want to give status of it update on the status of the rail grant. >> Submitted a proposal for the proposal and I guess we're discussing it next week.
>> Yeah. So, uh Walter did a first run, first pass. I I did a second pass. I handed it off to Brian who's working on it. Uh, but we want to put it up on Google Docs and it would just be easier for everyone to put it on Google Docs.
Gave it to Brian on uh Thursday and so Brian still um has it. I didn't understand that he hadn't made any corrections to it or changes or put it up already. But tonight, since I
included Martha in that email, I'm gonna ask Martha. So Brian, can you send all that information that I sent you? And then Ma, can you put that all up on Google Docs and and you're going to share it with all of us plus Mary?
>> Mary Mary >> from the terror school. >> Okay. Okay. Um, so when I get the trail grant from Brian, >> yeah, >> I will then turn it into a Google doc. And this is not a open meeting law
violation because it's a grant application. >> One, two, three commission members out of seven is fine. >> Okay. But when I make it a Google doc, is it just the three of us looking at it then? >> I'm not sharing it with the other guys.
>> No, I said these you three. You can even take yourself out of it, but we need you to put it up there. Okay. >> So, it's only three. So three is fine. >> Okay. >> You're not sharing it with the entire commissions and it is not I don't think it's an open meeting.
>> Okay. >> To work on that and it's certainly less than a quorum. >> Okay. So share it with me, Brian, you Walt, and Mary. And I'll have to dig for
Mary's. >> I can send that to you. >> Okay. >> You find that too. And so we need to have not only this one finished, but we wanted to do a second one for something else, which I'm not going to mention, but we're we have another one that we
wanted to write. Um, and then Walt, do you remember the uh due date? February 14th. >> February 2. >> February 2nd. And need Andrew to look at it >> beforehand. All right.
>> Calling DCR trail grant program is also fine. I think I'm going to put in a call. I keep on threatening to do that, but I'm going to call tomorrow and I'm going to see if I can get a template for an application for something else that I was thinking of.
So, that's what we we're doing. We're we're trying to head a bit above water on this thing and fighting for February 2nd. And uh and it still has to be looked at by u Andrew McNickle. So
>> you guys understand this is to build the trail behind recal. >> I didn't know. >> Yeah, it's the design. We're looking for a grant for the design, right? >> Design, engineering, and construction costs for that for that trail. And then we'll come back if we get this grant. Um
>> that has nothing to do with the trail that the um shoot the boy scout was referring to, right? No. something completely different. >> Yeah. No, no, no one's building a trail there, >> but this grant >> to clarify is not for construction. Construction.
>> It's Yeah. And I probably choked on construction cost. >> So estimate plan. It's all planning. Planning and design. >> It's all planning. >> There's no execution. >> We'll come back with execution phase two. >> Okay.
We'll set on that one. Next one. Next item is a budget update. Do you want to take us through that? >> So, Shra and I, we met with Joe from Fincom uh Saturday morning at Cafe >> Joe Carne.
>> Joe Parner. Yeah. Yep. At uh Cafe Narrow productive meeting. Um there's a lot of unanswered questions that we have. Um, Chuck will probably have to send you a follow-up email some of the the background of how this all got started
because I didn't have those answers >> when it was first brought up. Brian, obviously, first thing I went that sounds extremely reasonable. It is reasonable. Um, it's like 1/100th of a percent of the actual budget and they
have roughly $20,000 in free cash that's out there. So, can it be done? Absolutely. Um I think I don't know sure if you did it or not if you had talked to Matt at maybe the town management meeting in November. If if not that was
that was asked uh by Joe. The other question that they had was we on the 2026 budget. I didn't know that answer. >> We have done no work. We're we're looking for direction. That's kind of what he was telling me that basically like
>> you would need something done, >> you would ask Matt or Jane or Andrew for the cash and then it would uh be sent to you. Um, so I guess there's a lot more uh discovery on my end that I got to figure out to wrap my head around this
whole $20,000 budget item um to figure out what's what's within the $20,000 that we need. Yeah, >> it's it's a to me it's a very reasonable number seeing what some of these projects and everything costs and volunteer work. Um I learned about you know just having we we talked about
Matara Cabin. We didn't know that there's another resource out there specifically for Matara Cabin. Those are some of the things that we were talking about. Um so we learned a lot about that but it it did feel like it can be done. He also feels like we're a little behind.
>> Yeah. and he als his his other concern was that right now there's a chance they be may be proposing an override in the fall >> uh because of their financial situation which wouldn't be good for our position.
He just said if that happens there's going to be layoffs and things like that. So, he says it can be done, but it might be it might be worth pushing it off until next next year and starting discussions with Matt in the town town management meetings in November.
>> That's kind of the gist of what I got. I learned a lot. I never been through that process with somebody with the town. >> Um, but it's definitely reasonable. >> Yeah. I don't I didn't think we were going to make 2026, but we want to get in the process. >> Yeah. Yeah. We want to get on the on the
right track. >> Am I missing anything? Nope. Just the mechanics of it currently. >> All right. So, you can send that email. I would say with that email, you can you can like share it with like the chair or vice chair uh in case Brian has some
more questions, but you couldn't do it with two other members. >> He he did say I would probably have to talk to Andrew and Jane yourself as well. >> Yeah. >> Well, I haven't I haven't met. >> Yeah. So we can uh so Andrew first probably and then uh maybe all of us we
can meet with Jane and see how this goes. >> Yep. >> So uh start with the email and then we'll figure out next steps. >> We can make the FY26 budget round which is remote at this point but um we'll see.
>> Right. And Joe said it was okay if I could copy him on the email just in case I say something the wrong way to you he can correct me. Are you okay with that? Yeah. >> All right. >> Yeah. >> If you're just going to send it to one person, send it to one. >> Okay.
Yeah. Okay. Thank you. The next is the tree removal policy. Um, first a question. Have you guys even seen that there's uh a marked up version on our website
under the the projects page? >> No. >> Okay. In there, there's something um for the tree policy. Chuck, can you bring that up? >> We're not going to get into the details at this point. You guys have to read it and understand it before we can move forward. Plus, some additional items
need to go into it. But just so you see what we're doing and what we're trying to do. Um the tree policy has existed for a while and we've found a number >> anyone read that >> a number of places where >> we've run into loophole problems and
what have you. Um that's not the marked up one though, is it? >> No. >> No. Okay. Um so let me find that one. >> You try to find the markedup one. >> It's online but that's fine. We have to
get into details anyway. So one of the things one of the things we wanted to close we wanted to be sure we explicitly mentioned vernal pools. So there's number of places where I've added language for vernal pools. Uh, additionally with the project we had
with the National Grid and Cedar Swamp, um, a loophole in the language that was used against us, um, had to do with the fact that we talked about within the buffer zone and
they said, but within the buffer zone is not explicitly saying you can't be in the resource itself. So we were thinking that not within the buffer zone meant everything inside of it including the water. Um so what I've
done is I've added a few places a phrase that says or the resource area. So not only is within buffer zone that's protected actually in the resource itself is protected. Uh also you've heard in a number of meetings we've been
steering people to actual natives um with this language in here saying or cultivar that's being taken out. Um and those are the main changes from that perspective.
Um, another piece we want to add is uh explanation, some language talking about the tree policy only covers four trees u or fewer uh four live trees
or fewer. So it explains some of the dead tree situation and explains that anything bigger than that if it's a single family home and more than four trees or if it's commercial or if it's something like a condo situ
situation then it's not covered explicitly under the tree policy that would have to be handled some other way perhaps an RDA perhaps NOI perhaps just a uh a conservation commission involvement having to do with more than
four trees being taken down. Nowhere in the uh current language does it talk about that. So that's another piece we want to add. >> It is it's right there under number three. >> Yeah. But but it doesn't get into the
fact that this is just this is all that it covers. Uh people read this and they think that they don't get that the tree policy is only for if it's outside the tree it's outside the four limit then it's a different process. >> Yeah. >> All right. So the people can't just do
math and say well if it's 250 per tree for four trees and if I have 10 trees I just do the math and that's the number. The point is it's a different process a different approach. uh and that number may or may not be an approximation of where it goes, but it we're not
constrained by this language. This language is four trees of fewer. Um what was the last piece we want? Oh, uh well, we're going to add an express uh definition of dead trees. That's
something we get into a lot. Does it look dead? Is there dead branches? Whatever. So, more information on that. Um Um, see, >> so what Chuck up what Chuck has up here
are the revisions and not the actual tree policy. Is that right? >> Well, Brian's probably talking about what he marked up and I thought he said just add this stuff to what I had sent him earlier today and I brought this
instead of Brian's. >> Yeah. So, and Walter just showed me that he has a copy of the actual tree policy, >> which is online. >> It's marked up online. The yellow is text to add. The red is text to remove. >> You know, some of this is not going to
be I mean, more words is not going to help sometimes. That's true. >> So, I I think I'm concerned about us having a definition for a dead tree. Um, that's very wordy. So, um,
and the other thing that I would say is the one, uh, that comes up, I'm not sure it needs to be covered or not, is, uh, people have been saying, oh, you count trees 6 in and greater. So, below that,
the thought is, >> they don't count. So they anything can happen to that area >> or the shrubs or the ground cover and that's not that's not part of it. I mean I would certainly tell them that and they'll
know right away but some other people may have reviewed the street policy and and um work on some weekend. So it might be a note that we have to put in there. >> That's a good point. We just ran into that fact. I still have a question about natives.
You're taking out cultivars. Should we say approved commission approved cultivars? Well, what we've been saying orally is true natives and saying not cultivar. Um my understanding though is there's still
some cultivars on the list. So I think minimum we have to call the list. I don't know the proper way to to say that other than true native not cult say true natives
true natives or or cultiv or no no cultivars unless it's on the reading list >> because those are on the list because they're a better species than what's native. >> Okay. I didn't know why they were on
there, but and I'm just thinking as a happy homeowner, finding native in my own experience is next to impossible. Finding cultivars is easy. >> Yeah. Well, but we're not really
interested in easy. We want it to be >> Yeah. It's important. >> Yeah. I'm not saying I'm choosing two extremes here, right? Between impossible and easy. You want it so that people will want to go out and do it.
>> So it has to be reasonable. That's because reason I'm saying somehow approved cultivars and that's what Chuck was saying basically. So ones approved ones that are on the reading only >> only those >> right? So it can't be any other cultivar. There's a few that we would
accept, only the ones on the um published list. >> For fear of being argumentative, who can who makes up that list and controls it? >> It's generally it's been me. >> It's been me. But it's, you know, I'm
just that's when things come up, I've changed. I've u >> Okay. Talking. Yeah, it's me. I'm >> the gatekeeper. >> I'm the gatekeeper. Okay. Okay. I'm good. >> I didn't know if you want to question
his his credentials like I did one time. >> I'm just gonna say I don't think it's impossible to find the native species. I have a booklet I got at one of the MACC conventions from a um nursery. It's in Ammerst, Mass, but it has a whole bunch
of native wetland trees. Um there must be some closer but I know that one exists >> but >> and they will ship to you. >> But I think the point is valid that we have to think about having a condition
that is actually something can be fulfilled. >> And I'm not saying it has to be easy but it has to be reasonable a reasonable effort for people to get the trees you want them to get. And if there's something that is very difficult for whatever reason, maybe we leave it in
the list, but we don't talk about it. And so it it's a compromise in that doesn't have to be easy. That's not the driving point. >> There's plenty of trees on that list. No one's no one's some people have called up and said, "I really want this
something or other." And we've had to get into a discussion about it. and there's always a spot to compromise, you know, move it outside the buffer zone or something like that. So, seems to have worked out. I mean, I mean, the list
could be more extensive for sure, but um >> yeah, >> I think it's been fine. >> I mean, it's always going to be more extensive. There's there's so many trees on it right now. >> Trees and shrubs and whatnot. another
shrub section. Okay. So, the point is just so you're aware that this conversation is coming um when we're going to actually decide. Chuck will include it in his meeting notes ahead of time. At that point, you really need to
read it. Um if you have feedback, you'll send it just to me and Chuck, not to the whole commission. Um but then we can have it uh in the meeting have have get through it quickly without having to do a line by line torturous
kind of a situation. Okay. So that this is basically a heads up that it's coming. So >> Brian, is this uh is this separate of the conversation we had with Genna a couple months back around the tree policy? I think beyond conservation, is
any of that being considered or is it just the edits that we've seen so far? This is just us cleaning up our language. >> Okay. >> And be very careful about I mean you could save your comments for the meeting. This is one of those open
meeting law problems because you don't want to get stuck by that. So if if Brian puts it up there and you make notes and you bring them to meeting, that's great. or if you make notes and you want me to incorporate them into one document and just kind of highlight who's done that, just send it
to me. So that's that's a way you can do it. So don't add anyone else and just add me. >> Yeah, that'd be fine. >> Unlike working on a grant, this would be a problem. >> Yeah. >> Okay. So next item, wetland regulation fees
discussion. Um this is also a heads up that we'll be having this conversation. We have a few areas where we run into issues over the past year and we want to get our numbers cleaned up. Um we have
guidance from town council on roughly the range uh for what the fees can be and what the driving force is behind the fees. Whoever made these fees, uh, I'm not sure what the motivation was
for them, but they're much higher than is found in any towns around us and higher than town councils council would allow. So, we have to revisit them. Um, I'm actually going to suggest a couple
that might actually go up, but you can look at it and see the big ones, $11 for this and what have you. Those are way beyond what other towns do. So, yeah. >> Sorry for my lack of knowledge. Yeah. What are they for? Do you
>> um you have a a fee to uh file various permits. Uh you have fees in there for >> these are applicants fees. >> Applicants. Okay. Um fees for how much how many linear feet you would be
adjusting. fees for how how many square feet of a resource area you'd be affected. Those kind of things and our numbers behind some of those are quite high. Um, and the way it works, and I'm going to take a shot at this, and then
Chuck can correct me. Um, the fees, there's a total which are then broken up into some for the state and some for the town. Uh, it's about 5050. a slight majority of it goes to the
town. Uh in the case of Reading, different towns can decide where that money goes. Reading has decided that fees we get, fee dollars we get goes into the general fund. Uh so this is different than the conservation fund
that we talk about for trees and what have you. These are fees coming in through the bylaws themselves. >> We're talking about >> What do I do? They're close enough. this this page in the packet. >> Yeah. >> Yeah. >> So, we're not really talking about that's a worksheet,
>> right? But it's actually in the text as well. >> But that might be something I was trying to figure out how to do this really simply. Make it simple. Um, but I think that we and I need to figure out what other towns are charging because that
would help us make it simple and and that seems to be it's like a that that seems to be the the way to move forward. Um, because it's like the first question ever asked. Did you check it out with other towns?
And we have these comparable cities. We need to uh make sure that we're in the same zone, but we're not going to touch the state fees at all. And that's where it's the fee is split. So that's stays the same. No one's talking about this.
We'll never get any part of the um bylaw fee. And so, um, this is just our bylaw. And those fees that are high were to prevent people from working in the resourced area, such as the the high
fees have to do with work in a bank in land underwater. So, you're like on the edge of a stream or you're under a stream or you're working in a wetland. Those are the high fees. And um I think that one of the there's
many suggestions. One of them is to reduce it. Maybe that happens. Another one is to cap it. Because these fees actually, in my opinion, work for small projects like homeowner edition, something like that. They're not outrageous
and they're a little bit of a deterrent. But when we get a big project, that's when it goes >> so high that it becomes a problem. and it's supposed to match, you know, the review time that's put on
it through the town. And so that's where we want to be in that area. So you could leave the fees the way they are also and just cap them at a certain amount. >> Yeah, I've seen that a number of times >> that can that can happen. I don't know where we're going to fall, but we need
to like have several discussions on it. Has to be, you know, advertised because it's a change. So there has to be at least three conversations about it. So we'll have plenty of time to go open this. >> Again, this is a heads up. Um you might
want to go into our regulations and look at the various fees that are called out in different sections just to get familiar what where we where we have fees and and what they're running. Um just so you get to prep for this conversation.
>> Yeah, I know. We'll have something up on the website and if you just review that that would be that would work also. If it's not up there we won't be talking about it because I gota get all that information ready for us. So >> also just to follow up uh since we had
the discussion uh you know last week can you just say you mentioned the general fund and the conservation committees but like can you just what are the what's the difference? the the general fund. I mean the town >> the town's general garics
>> as opposed to a conservation fund. Um I mean there's other funds around town. There's the um the shade tree fund or as as >> Andrew. >> Yeah. Andrew used to call it something. >> Yeah. So
>> but there's different funds. Ours is the conservation fund primarily. >> Yeah. Two funds. Wetland Protection Act has the ability to charge, but when towns create their
own bylaws, like we have a bylaw, it went fees also went into that. So, we're they're getting a wetland fee, which is pretty it's it's like a $100 no matter what the project is. It's pretty cheap. >> Yeah.
>> Um and so, um and then there's a bylaw fee. So because we have a bylaw, there's fees inside the bylaw. So >> and so if we propose changes to this bylaw fee, does it have to go to the bylaw committee and in front of town
meeting and all that to get the ch the fees changed? >> No. >> Why not? Because it's bylaw. >> Oh, we're not changing the bylaws. We're changing the regulations. Sorry if we started talking about bylaw. Sorry. We're going to make changes in the regulations. The bylaw says that we can
we can set fees. We're not changing that. >> We're just going to change our regulations. >> Fine. Thanks. >> Thank you for that. >> I want to detail. >> Yeah. Well, >> okay. >> I sat through a whole long town meeting thing about changing bylaws. So, that's what >> perked me up.
>> Okay. U then on to old new business. Um the uh meeting with DPW that was canceled. Chop. Um, oh, I had a meeting at I had a meeting with um Mike Cman. We we talked,
no one else was there. It was me and Mike. It was productive. We we have some things that we have to go and um look at which was carried over from the last meeting. And at the next meeting or the following meeting, I'll be presenting my list of
um projects that we that we need. I've been kind of waiting for the material cabin to be resolved, but it's it's still not resolved. It's we don't know what direction we're going in with the material cabin. So, um right now it looks like um the building commissioner
has started to review it, but we haven't found out which direction to go in. So, that's maybe some of my asks. >> Okay. Um, so quickly on violation notices, the
only update I have is on 445 Pearl Street. Mr. Rivers has made some progress. There was a pile of material in the driveway which is now gone. He has done grooming of the bank. So now the whole length of
it, it's a consistent slope. Um, I've not gotten out and done any measurements or picture taken or anything else, but he's making goods. It looks good. It certainly is better. >> Yeah.
Okay. Um, Chuck talked about the material cabin already. Anything else you administer report or is that it? >> Um, no. Um, we we're just waiting for the material cabinet. That was my report.
>> Okay. And that brings us to minutes for approval. >> Yeah. One last thing. Added Mr. Joe Flurry to the budget group. >> Oh, that's right. Is that what you wanted to do? >> Yeah, I think that's a good idea. >> Did you tell me to put on the adventure?
>> I thought somebody in the budget group could bring that up in there. They have for another program, but >> So, what's the to make a motion to Point Joe Flurry to the budget group for the conservation.
>> Okay. Make a motion. >> I'd like to make a motion to appoint Joe Flurry to the budget group to represent the conservation. >> Talbert seconds. Walter Talbert's in favor. >> In favor in favor. >> Martha Moore in favor.
>> I guess Brian B in favor. Okay, that's a good point. Okay, minutes. Just be be careful with those emails. So now I know that he's just an associate member, but that's a gray line and you're going to >> include Brian. So for right now,
probably remove Joe. But can I follow up with him? >> Or you could just be the lead person and deal with Joe and Trot and then just deal with Brian and me or something like that. Like separated that way. >> Yeah. We just don't want to have Coral.
>> Yep. So even though he doesn't have voting power, is it still a quorum? >> I can check tomorrow and but I just feel like uh the way we do it is he can do he can be participate in all whatever the
conservation commission uh does except for vote. >> But but I think the reason we have to be careful and think of him that way is because in certain situations we can promote him to a voting membership. And so if he's had these kind of
conversations at that point, does it violate something? Better safe than sorry and treat him as if he's a full-fledged member when it comes to these communications. Okay. Minutes. Um we have a number. Um
so >> I move that we approve the September 24th minutes. >> Walter Talbert seconds. Walter Talbert. All in favor? >> You in favor? >> Martha Moore in favor. Do you want any
discussion before that? >> Brian. No, no, discussion is people send comments to Emily. We don't need any discussion beyond that. >> Okay. And you I interrupted before you got to vote. >> Brian's in favor. >> Thank you. >> I did a check mark already. Uh, next one
is October 8th. >> I didn't see October 8th. >> I didn't see you knew that. >> Okay. Few Okay. October 22nd. Did >> Yes. I'll move that we approve um the October 22nd minutes.
>> Walter Talbert seconds. Walter Talbert approves. >> Michelle in favor. >> Uh Charles Green in favor. >> Rick in favor. >> Martha Moore in favor. >> Brian Bell in favor. Um November 12th. I did see that. >> Yep. I move that we approve the November 12th minutes.
>> Walter Talbert seconds. Walter Talbert approves. Tim Sheldon in favor in favor. >> Rick Kio in favor. >> Barthmore in favor. >> Right in favor. >> I think that's all we have. >> Have not seen December 10th yet.
Okay. Uh that's it. Any last comments before we disappear? No. We have a motion to adjourn at 8. >> Nope. That's wrong. 8:24 I move to adjourn at 8:24
>> Walter Thomas seconds Walter Thomas in favor in favor >> Martha Moore in favor >> in favor you guys hang out for a second >> y >> good night everyone thanks
>> wow before 8:30 good job easier if you had